Dear All,
I'm quoting the following observations:
The theory of evolution proposes that mankind once lived in the trees of Africa, mankind in the distant past was a tree dwelling primate. Mankind then proceeded to leave life in the branches behind, and evolved into a land based, hunter and gatherer. This it appears is the tale that the evolutionary theory offers as an explanation as to where mankind came from.
There is a deep contradiction between the evolutionary model and the observed physical traits that mankind exhibits. Mankind is inherently unfit for survival in the natural world.
Here are the observed traits that directly contradict this evolutionary model.
1) Man walks in an upright posture, using only two legs for movement, and not four legs. A bipedal creature takes more time to reach a maximum running speed, than a quadrupedal creature does. In both pursuit of prey and evasion from predators, man is at a distinct disadvantage using this bipedal method of movement. Man cannot run at speed, cannot change direction quickly, man cannot even jump effectively. So how did mankind ever establish himself as a land based, hunter and gatherer, given that his method of movement is handicapped?
2) The offspring of every other species in Africa after being born, are up and running in some instances in a matter of days, from other observations it might be only a few weeks. The offspring of man will take about three to four years to learn to run. The observed duration of time the human offspring requires to be able to evade predators is far too long. Without any doubt, this one observation alone, will contradict the notion of a survival of the fittest in man's case.
3) Human offspring after birth must be carried by the parents for a minimum of two to three years. Other creatures such as monkeys for example, have offspring that are able to cling to their mother's fur. It is observed that the human infant cannot cling to its' mother's fur, the human infant must be carried by the mother. This places the human mother at a distinct evolutionary disadvantage. Every creature on earth after being born will fight to survive, almost from birth they compete for a share of the food that the mother provides. Human offspring are powerfully handicapped, human offspring must be deliberately fed by the mother and for some considerable time. It takes years before the human infant may locate food without any assistance. Why has evolution handicapped the human female of the species with a very long gestation period. Then the longest duration of all the species on earth for the development of the young into adulthood. Talk about an immense evolutionary handicap, man is unfit for survival by any measure.
4) During the day and especially at night, Africa is a very dangerous place for the slow moving, bipedal human. A human has no natural defensive or aggressive features to its' anatomy. Man does not have a thick hide, no fangs to speak of, claws are absent, shall we also mention that man is also a very weak species. Even a chimpanzee at half our size, is approximately three times stronger than we are. So how did early man ever become established on the plains of Africa as a hunter and gatherer? Well not in strength or speed, or any natural attribute. The evidence dictates that man must have had access to tools, and tools at the very moment he set foot on level ground. Survival in the wild is impossible for mankind without spears, clubs, shields, etc. An evolutionary contradiction is observed.
5) Having mentioned that man is a remarkable creature in that the male is not a very strong creature. The human female is a far weaker physical creature than the male, so then, the human female cannot take part in the hunting of other creatures. Around the world in primitive tribes, the female is consigned to raising the offspring in a safe environment. Every other species of predator on earth, the female will do the hunting. Mankind is the standout contradiction to this rule of survival. Mankind has only half or less of the available population, to partake in the hunt. Another observable handicap for survival.
6) Since man was defined as an omnivore by evolutionary design, a hunter and a gatherer. There arises another serious problem with this ideology. Man cannot eat raw meat and definitely cannot eat meat that is not fresh. Every other predator is able to eat raw meat and meat that is not fresh. Why has evolution favored a creature with such special dietary restrictions? When man first hunted, man must have also had access to fire. The ability to create fire precedes the ability to hunt. It is safe to therefore to assume, that man must have been a herbivore. Then after discovering how to make fire, man was only then enabled to hunt. Our evolutionary digestive system does not favor man as a hunter. I reject the notion that man was ever an omnivore by evolutionary design.
7) Man has no inbuilt navigation system like every other creature on earth. Evolutionists propose the following idea to explain this evolutionary handicap in mankind, 'man must have lost the ability to navigate in the distant past'. A very technical explanation and an explanation that also lacks any intelligence. How does an essential attribute such as the ability to navigate ever become a lost attribute. The ability to navigate is critical to survival. How does the mechanism of evolution just forget an essential ability? How can a creature survive if it cannot find it's way home. How can a creature navigate and find an essential water source. Where was that fruit tree I ate from last week? Evolutionary theory needs to address this observed contradiction in natural selection.
8) Where in the world have primitive tribes been observed that do not live in shelters? How did man protect himself and his young offspring from the rain and the cold? There are not enough caves in Africa to house early man? How did mankind protect himself day and night without walls to hide behind. How the devil did mankind ever survive without these shelters, weaponry, and fire? Observation and theoretical ideology are in conflict.
9) Man's intellect is vastly beyond what is necessary for man to survive in the wild. Science as usual has no answer to this anomaly.
10) If man ever lived in the trees, how did the female hold onto her infant for two to three years, and still move through the canopy?
Observation proves that mankind needs an external force to oversee mankind in order for mankind to survive. Evolutionary theory leads to extinction in 99% of species, in man's case that figure should be 100%. Man was never designed to survive in the natural world by any standard of natural fitness, mankind is rather, a greatly handicapped and special species. Man had been gifted with everything in order to survive as a species, before the race to survive actually began.
klutedavid
Christian Forums
Michael
lain:
